Mini 546: House Mafia - Game Over

[Erg0]

Before I pick my buddies, who did I replace?

[Erg0]

Erm...

I'll join Pooky - everyone knows there's a limit of one Aussie per team.

Ok, it's one for the entire show, but you get the idea.

[Erg0]

In that case (ha!) we should take trustgossip, or whoever ends up in that spot. Y'know, for balance. Unless it's somebody we don't like.

[Erg0]

Vote: shaft.ed

for making the obvious Radiohead joke and generally being a smartarse.

[Erg0]

Call me dense, but I don't see it. Can you explain why it was a slip?

[Erg0]

Not hating on Radiohad, hating on shaft.ed. Get it right.

[Erg0]

While we're on the subject, what is the significance of the teams? Perhaps lynching a member of the other team provides some kind of advantage?

[Erg0]

Plus, he's on our team. Traitor!

[Erg0]

What would have been so bad about putting the third vote on him?

[Erg0]

So you were going to vote him because of the hamster, then you decided not to because of the hamster? You're just making stuff up now...

Unvote, Vote: armlx

[Erg0]

You deserve to die just for that.

[Erg0]

While we're on the subject, what is the significance of the teams? Perhaps lynching a member of the other team provides some kind of advantage?

That was pretty much my guess. Perhaps the "winning" team gets some kind of night power or something.

Having said that, the priority is obviously to lynch a bad doctor, regardless of which team he/she is on.

[Erg0]

I'd guess by getting a member of the other team lynched.

[Erg0]

Makes sense to me.

vollkan, do you want to be Chase or should I?

[Erg0]

Interesting theory. Why is it so?

Also, my meta on TG has him making bad excuses for not posting on day 1 when he's town (see Candy Mafia).

[Erg0]

Interesting theory. Why is it so?

Also, my meta on TG has him making bad excuses for not posting on day 1 when he's town (see Candy Mafia).

I love how I drew two votes before I had a chance to reply.

nice.

I meta based upon one game is crap. A one-game meta read of me could demonstrate that I claim doctor on day 1's, and then claim that I fakeclaimed during twilight of day 1's, when I really am a doctor.

whatever.

I'm not calling TG town based on that one thing, but I am saying that it's not a valid scumtell from him - certainly not valid enough to warrant two votes.

Why would the first group be more likely to contain scum? Strength in numbers -- they would be the group more likely to pay attention to the rules and knew immediately they could team up.

A query: which of the teams would you call the "first" based on this theory? Pooky certainly volunteered to lead first, but vollkan's team filled more quickly at the beginning of the game. I know both team leaders to be competent players, so I just chose the team with least members, which was when the numbers evened up at 3 apiece. If scum were more motivated to join teams early, then I'd argue that it would be

your

team that's more likely to contain scum.

[Erg0]

You don't feel that post 85 counts as hearing something from him? What are you expecting him to say with more votes on him?

[Erg0]

I'd like Adel and Dean to respond to my questions on the previous page.

[Erg0]

Why would the first group be more likely to contain scum? Strength in numbers -- they would be the group more likely to pay attention to the rules and knew immediately they could team up.

A query: which of the teams would you call the "first" based on this theory? Pooky certainly volunteered to lead first, but vollkan's team filled more quickly at the beginning of the game. I know both team leaders to be competent players, so I just chose the team with least members, which was when the numbers evened up at 3 apiece. If scum were more motivated to join teams early, then I'd argue that it would be

your

team that's more likely to contain scum.

This one is for you.

[Erg0]

apply pressure to TG, because i personally wanted to hear somehting from him.

You don't feel that post 85 counts as hearing something from him? What are you expecting him to say with more votes on him?

That one. Is it really so much to ask for people to read back one page?

[Erg0]

Unvote, Vote: Dean Harper

Has failed to adequately address the reason for his "pressure" vote on TG.

[Erg0]

You still didn't actually answer my question, though: why did you feel like TG needed pressure to get him talking when he'd just made a large post above yours?

"I was joking" is

not

a defence at this stage of the game, and looks like an attempt to backpedal now that you've realised you have no logic to back up your action.

[Erg0]

It's never too early for logic.

Besides, it's more than a lack of logic; it's blatant opportunism with a poorly constructed facade of good intentions.

[Erg0]

unvote, vote:Erg0

in a blatantly opportunistic attempt to rid this game of a big 'ole

GRUMP!

I suggest an adjustment of your expectations.

[Erg0]

Well that was a lot of fuss over nothing in particular.

I'm still happy with my Dean vote. I'd urge others to join me in the hope of forcing him to expand on his previous answer to my question.

[Erg0]

Ok, well that explains the team thing.

Sorry, I got a bit lost during Pooky and vollkan's little chat, so I need a reread to pick things up from here. Our team's choices are:

TheJiveMachine
curiouskarmadog
vollkan
Adel
shaft.ed

[Erg0]

An important question I would really really like for all player to answer as soon as possible:

Did you:
a. Remember
b. Forget
c. Never know

that

4) The bad doctors cannot kill you. This is the Princeton-Plainsboro Teaching Hospital, not the Hezbollah recruitment office.

Which is it? A? B? or C?

I remembered that after reading TG's post about the kill. It wasn't at the front of my mind prior to that.

[Erg0]

Something to consider is that Erg0 and Pooky would probably be the hardest to nail as scum.

This seems perjorative to me. I'm not sure about Pooky, but historically I'm just hard to lynch, period.

[Erg0]

Sorry, I've been moving house and had almost no access for the last week or so (see sig). I'm back now and will keep going with this if it's continuing.

[Erg0]

Erg0 - what kind of a meta read do you have on Jive Machine?

also, why are you so active on mafiascum.net outside of this thread?

I have a long-winded excuse prepared, but I'll skip that and just say that the main reason is that I'm further behind in this game than I am in the others, thus it is taking me longer to catch up to the point where I have something useful to say.

I'm in one other game with Jive, but it's ongoing and he's still alive so it's not super-useful for meta purposes. I will say that his play there is not entirely unlike his play here, though he seems more willing to lead with his vote in that game. His hesitancy in voting both shaft.ed and Pooky is slightly out of character from what I can see.

Jive: To what extent does the size of the wagon affect your decision on whether to use a vote or FoS to express your suspicion of a player?

[Erg0]

I still think that both scum are in team LU.

Er... I thought there were three...?

@ Erg0: I don't know if this is playstyle issue or what, but I'd rather you weigh in on your suspicions of people instead of directing a question at someone who is unlikely to answer anyway.

Yeah, I'm working on it - this is me trying to work my way back into the game gradually. In general terms, I think we're choosing between shaft.ed, Jive and (maybe) ckd for today, since Adel and vollkan are contributing too strongly to be real candidates for a day 1 lynch.

shaft.ed has been somewhat up and down, as there have been a few of his posts that I've really disliked. An example is post 266, which contains fairly thin reasons to suspect every member of the other team, and reads to me like he's trying to be active while still keeping his options open). He's also done some good stuff, and I need to reread him in more detail before I make a final decision.

TheJiveMachine is a somewhat different animal, as he has clearly done some scummy things (e.g. twice FoSing and then switching to a vote after pressure was applied), but the question is really whether he is newbtown or newbscum. He may be worth keeping alive if he's likely to be replaced for inactivity at some point, but at the moment I'd be willing to take a risk and lynch him for both scumminess and probable noise factor.

curiouskarmadog... hmm. Opinion pending.

[Erg0]

Shafted, good poster, good content. Appears to be scum hunting. Good vibes all around here.

General question: how much does scum hunting count for if you don't agree with the reasoning and/or the conclusions?

I agree that shaft.ed has been actively poking, but there are a few posts where he's given cases that I've thought are somewhat weak (e.g. the one I mentioned above). Barring the blip where he got a little worked up over Pooky's pressure on him, I'm finding it a little difficult to get a handle on him right now.

[Erg0]

Post 2, the forgotten point: my hazy memory of ckd from a newbie game I modded has him being a little emotional at times. This goes back to the question of whether anger/overreaction is actually a scumtell, and in his case I'd say "not necessarily". Certainly not enough to use this tell reliably.

[Erg0]

I guess I'd define it as stating suspicion of and/or actively pursuing individuals who you appear to genuinely believe are scum. By my definition, it basically amounts to "not lurking and not obviously faking it", which is why it's a point in a player's favour but not solid proof of innocence.

[Erg0]

I think I accidentally dropped the emphasis when I edited that last sentence before posting: I meant to stress that I thought it was a

fairly minor

point in favour, unless I feel confident that I can reliably tell whether a particular player is genuinely scumhunting or just trying to give the appearance.

I agree that asking good questions is part of scumhunting, I intended that to be included in the "actively pursuing" part of the definition.

[Erg0]

Huzzah!

Beep, your predecessor was coming under some pressure so we're looking for some content from you. Once you've read, can we have a rundown of your thoughts on the game so far?

[Erg0]

Well, I guess that qualfies as content. I think Beep has been eliminated as a default lynch candidate at this point.

[Erg0]

LOL

[Erg0]

Ah - I completely failed to notice that was the hammer. Beep, were you aware of that?

[Erg0]

I notice that Dean has just popped back up in the newbie queue, so it may be worth checking whether he knows he's still in this game. The replacements thread is a bit rough and ready right now, I see.

[Erg0]

As for Beep messing up game mechs, I'm fairly sure thats a true thing especially as he didn't get why Pooky didn't vote me (on same team and what not).

Does not compute:

Oh, another thing. I'm only allowed to vote for my non-team members, right?

In this case, between Pooky and armlx, I'll pick armlx.

vote: armlx

I'm undecided on that being accidental, there do seem to be a number of things in Beep's analysis that indicate a detailed read (e.g. talks of Pooky being his "usual disruptive self"), so I'm inclined to take it with a grain of salt.

[Erg0]

I feel like I should vote someone now.

Vote: Beep! Beep!

He seems like a pretty good option for a day 1 lynch, I'd say. Even if the hammer truly was an accident, the vote was wagonny, and his predecessor was fairly scummy. Also, I don't want to spend five pages arguing about him tomorrow.

[Erg0]

Hmmm.

Well, one out of two ain't bad I suppose.

[Erg0]

TG: this game isn't a normal mini.

Town doesn't get that heady and powerhungry. It seems more like you thought your bus was successful.

You are attacking a player for being in on a successful lynch. Who was the player we lynched? armix. That doesn't compute. He is a good player.
If you want to identify scum look at Beep! Beep!'s wagon.

'f it.

vote: TrustGossip.

First: What are you voting for?

Second: Didn't you say on the last page that you

supported

the Beep wagon?

[Erg0]

I'd just like to say my current suspicions are of Erg0 and curiouskarmadog.

Once again, I find this strange. It appears that you're trying to distance yourself from a townie lynch that you were on yourself. In fact, you confirmed your vote on Beep on the last page, which would indicate that you had some belief that he was scum.

[Erg0]

So what's your justification for pointing at Beep's wagon for the scum?

I'm hijacking your post, Erg0.

Original Roll String: 2d2

2 2-Sided Dice: (1, 2) = 3

-Albert

[Erg0]

Y'know who's really good at picking people's alignments? Scum.

[Erg0]

Oh, so you didn't really

want

to lynch him, you were just leaving your vote on him as we approached deadline in order to encourage him to post?

[Erg0]

You do realise how that makes you look, given that he was speedlynched by scum as soon as I put the second vote on him? It makes you look like scum setting up a mislynch whilst maintaining a position of deniability, from which you can point at the person who makes the second vote and say "look, he's all suspicious!"

[Erg0]

Nice sidestep, but my point isn't about whether you were thinking about how you look at the time. It's about the shaky ground you're standing on when trying to direct suspicion at me for joining your townie wagon.

In any case, I think you know

exactly

how you look now, given your immediate attempts to distance yourself from the lynch.

[Erg0]

Your first reaction to a townie lynch that you were on was to "megaFOS" the other person on the wagon. It appears to me that you're trying to shift the blame elsewhere in order to minimise your perceived responsibility for the mislynch. If someone didn't check the votecount, they'd never know that you were even involved based on that post.

[Erg0]

With regard to context, it was fairly clear that Pooky's FoS was due to my vote, so QFTing him thus implies that you also found my vote suspicious. Your previous talk about me focused on my lack of contribution without strongly expressing suspicion on those (or any other) grounds, so it's hardly reasonable to conclude that you were using that as the basis of your QFT.

The votecount thing is not intended to be taken literally. I was emphasising the point that you completely ignored the fact that you'd contributed to a townie's lynch, and focused instead on going after me, apparently for the same thing.

[Erg0]

So why did you QFT Pooky's post?

[Erg0]

Also I think you're confusing me defending against you as attacking.

2) I am town. Armix was scum. I don't understand Erg0's sudden compulsion of "I feel I should vote now. Beep is the lynch today. Mum's the word, pip pip cheerio."

You can see why I'm confused. When were you defending me?

[Erg0]

Ah, gotcha. In that case, TG: I'm not confusing the two. This is purely relating to the initial "megaFoS", and I'm not sure where you would have got the impression that I was interpreting your further posts as anything other than a defence of your actions.

[Erg0]

I do. I'd rather give Pooky the ball and see how he runs with it.

[Erg0]

I'm disappointed that nobody else voted for Pooky. I'm sure it would have helped his crusade.

[Erg0]

Ergo, your thoughts on scum?

I've lost my train of thought a bit (hence my being a smartarse instead of contributing), reread is pending.

[Erg0]

I seem to remember you using a very similar excuse earlier in this game.

[Erg0]

It's unrelated to alignment, it just tells me that you're unwilling to extend the same patience to others that you expect to be afforded to you. Using a phrase like "soak that excuse" implies that you think I'm being less than genuine in my intent to re-read. I told you what I'm doing, and I'll do it as fast as I can.

[Erg0]

So what's your justification for pointing at Beep's wagon for the scum?

I'm hijacking your post, Erg0.

Original Roll String: 2d2 (STATIC)

2 2-Sided Dice: (1, 2) = 3

-Albert

Incidentally, is anyone at all curious as to what this was about?

Event randomizer. -Albert

[Erg0]

Ok, quick commentary on team NLU, since that's the easiest place to start.

ckd: very likely town, unless he was bussing amrlx hardcore. I feel like the low number of votes required makes it less likely that scum would bus their buddy in this situation, so he's looking pretty good to me right now.

Adel: Up and down, but her vote was in the right place when it counted. She did hold this up as a talisman to an extent, and I'm still a bit iffy on her pointing at the Beep wagon as scummy after showing support prior to the lynch. Less convinced of her innocence than ckd's, but she's not really scummy at this point.

vollkan/shaft.ed: Naturally more suspicious than the other two because they weren't on the scum wagon, but that's more due to process of elimination than anything. vollkan is tough to read in general, so I'm going to read him in more depth before drawing a conclusion. I had mixed feelings on shaft.ed day 1, so of the former Team NLU he's highest on my suspicion list at this point.

[Erg0]

Obviously vollkan and I do the same thing when analysing lynched scum. I looked at others' talk about armlx first, with the following results:

TrustGossip:

Starts with minor suspicion of early wagoning, then reates armlx as neutral in 246. In 329 he finds armlx barnacle-y, giving him a "heavy FoS" pending lurker prods. Pushes for some answers in 351, and unFoSes in 354, agreeing with armlx's assessment of ckd's overreaction. Sticks by this in 372, but then says in 385 that he "wouldn't mind armlx going", which seems very inconsistent with his recent posting. This rings alarm bells for me.

curiouskarmadog:

Consistently goes after armlx hard for most of the day - I have difficulty believing that this was bussing, unless he genuinely intended to get armlx lynched from the start of the day.

Dean Harper/Thanatos:

Nothin'

vollkan:

Mildly critical of armlx early on, gives him a 70% in 281 and criticises his case on ckd later on. FoSes armlx in 376, but never really looks like voting him. Pretty neutral read overall.

Pooky:

One mention, in post 328 when he calls armlx "total scum" at the height of his wagon. Not very useful on its own.

Adel:

Follows armlx onto early wagons, but switches to voting him right after the twist - she says at the time that she's basically following ckd's hunch. Actively pursues him over his claim that he was using the same tactic as her (I doubt that he would associate himself back to his scumbuddy this way). Doesn't particularly look like bussing to me.

shaft.ed:

Talks about armlx quite a bit in the early part of the game, almost always in the company of others (often Pooky). His statement in 266 that "Scum getting those [lynch-1 and lynch-2] confused tend to behave less rationally", which doesn't quite ring true to me. In 269 (just after ckd puts the lynch-1 vote on) he posts a fairly strong analysis and says he'll wait for vollkan to post on the subject before he votes. vollkan puts armlx at 70% in 281, but shaft.ed is missing for a bit and likes armlx better in 348 and 403. Promises a case on armlx a couple of times, but it doesn't come before Beep hammers. Apparent reluctance to pull the trigger after early suspicion is a concern.

Based on this half of the analysis, TG and shaft.ed look like armlx's most likely buddies. Pooky is mildly suspicious based on the lack of talk about armlx prior to his declaration that he was scum. Others are at neutral or townish. I need to do the other half to draw full conclusions, but I don't expect any major surprises (hopefully it will fill in some information on a couple of players).

[Erg0]

Sorry, that wasn't phrased very well - by "recent posting" I meant posts immediately prior to your statement in 385. In other words, posts 354 and 372.

[Erg0]

Ok, part 2 of my armlx retrospective. I've skimmed vollkan's comments above, but I'm trying to do this independently of his opinions as much as possible. Post numbers in this case come from isolating armlx's posts.

TrustGossip:

armlx calls him town all day, with the same reasoning all the way through - that he gives the appearance of having no additional knowledge from the start of the game. Only blip is his early avatar related non-vote, which he cites in post 26 as one of his deliberately scummy actions. No evidence of distancing here, straight down the line all the way.

curiouskarmadog:

Puts him at 40% scum early on (and votes him in the same post, weird), then goes after him for overreaction in 31 and continues this for the rest of the day, though he never votes him until after he's already lynched. The tunneling on ckd looks like a classic scum push on a townie, and I doubt he would have risked throwing a vote on his buddy after he'd been lynched, since losing two scum on day 1 would have been disastrous.

Dean Harper/Thanatos:

Basically just complains about his lurking a couple of times.

vollkan:

Puts him at 20% scum early, in 37 he just says that voll's passed the day 1 test and only talks to him about the overreaction tell after that. Pretty much left him alone all day, which could be a sign of buddying with someone he was worried about.

Pooky:

Puts him at 60% early on, but forgets him once he starts after shaft.ed. Following Pooky was the other deliberately scummy act that he claimed in 26 (I don't actually see where he did this). Drops him along with vollkan in 37.

Adel:

Votes her early, and puts her at 80%(!) in his first list, despite unvoting her at the same time. By post 19 she's down to 40% because he's found a "real" target in shaft.ed. From around post 24 he tries to paint her as scum for doing much the same thing he claims to have done, which doesn't strike me as a particularly good scum tactic. Eventually decides she seems pro-town based on her changing styles, possibly because he was close to lynch and she was one of the voters.

shaft.ed:

Puts him at 80% scummy in 11, says in 13 it's for posting without content. Pairs him with Jive when voting him in 18, and continues this association until switching to Jive in 23 (without mentioning shaft.ed in that post). Doesn't mention him again until post 32, where he says he finds him less scummy now that he looks at him again. Comes back to him in 37, saying that he now realises why he thought he was scummy in the first place. The big push followed by a long silence followed by the flip-flopping is not a good sign.

Conclusions: Based on the two analyses, I suspect armlx was taking a different approach with each of his buddies: distancing from one and buddying up with the other.

shaft.ed is the obvious suspect for the distanced scum, since ckd seems way

over

-distanced and Jive/Beep is dead town. The other scum is likely one of TrustGossip, vollkan and Pooky, all of whom he never really attacked in any serious way. His swingy attitude towards Adel seems to indicate that he was likely trying to get her onside (due to her vote on him) rather than putting distance between them. The wildcard is Thanatos, who's given us almost nothing to go on either way to this point.

Most likely scum goes first.

Vote: shaft.ed

[Erg0]

Unfos: Armix

Thank you. I also agree with your assessment of CKD. It was the first time in the game I've used my vote as a weapon in scumhunting and I believe I fished out a satisfactory result.

This is post 354. Although some of the post is about ckd, the context is of you agreeing with armlx and withdrawing a prior FoS on him - hence, you're giving a favourable opinion on armlx in this post. Your case on ckd may be independent of this opinion, but you definitely are giving an opinion on him here.

[Erg0]

Erg0 I suggest you meta me more thoroughly before drawing your conclusions. I am not afraid to bus scumbuddies at all especially in a game like this where there is no risk of drawing suspicion for not being NK'd. Look how no attention is being given CKD or Adel following the lynch. I also prefer long discussions before lynching, and it should be noted that we had a member of our team contributing nothing the entire cycle. There's no way I'm going to hammer someone without hearing anything from that player.

Given that you just told me how I should meta you, you'll forgive me if I don't take it at face value.

Finally this is a total mischaracterization:

vollkan puts armlx at 70% in 281

So my list is:-

Dean - 75%
Pooky - 70%
armlx - 70%
Erg0 - 60%
TG - 50%

The 70% is not in isolation.

My point was more that you said you'd wait for vollkan's opinion, but didn't actually do anything with it when it came. One possible explanation is you were using the wait for vollkan as an excuse to avoid hammering your buddy, in the hope that the wagon would go away in the meantime.

[Erg0]

Unfos: Armix

Thank you. I also agree with your assessment of CKD. It was the first time in the game I've used my vote as a weapon in scumhunting and I believe I fished out a satisfactory result.

This is post 354. Although some of the post is about ckd, the context is of you agreeing with armlx and withdrawing a prior FoS on him - hence, you're giving a favourable opinion on armlx in this post. Your case on ckd may be independent of this opinion, but you definitely are giving an opinion on him here.

I think it's only human to have some amount of trust on a person who agrees with your opinion. In retrospect, I was so focused on CDK that I didn't consider armix much. Then again, it wasn't exactly my imperative to do so, he was on my team after all and not a possible lynch candidate for myself.

You're missing the point. I'm saying that you expressed this trust in him, and then went on to say in post 385 that you were ok with him being lynched.

Perhaps you should dredge up my summary posts on the entire population instead of this passing comment that is only notable in hindsight. The post cited gives no evidence that I had insider knowledge of armix's alignment. Your crusade is maligned.

Of course it's only notable in hindsight - when you said it I didn't know that armlx was scum yet. Your previous posts don't help your case, as they all express suspicion of armlx up to the point when you unFoS him for ill-defined reasons. The post where you initially FoS him is 329, in which you say: "Heavy FOS: armix As in, once I hear an update on all the lurkers and if they aren't horrendously suspicious... *bang*" I would expect that it would take a fairly dramatic reversal of your opinion of armlx to cause you to withdraw that FoS in 354, which is why your statement in 385 is so notable. Your only mention of armlx between these two posts is in 372, where you agree with armlx's case on ckd, so there's no transitional period from non-suspicion back to suspicion that I can see.

It's interesting how those being on the offensive on Day One are now the defenders of Day Two. Maybe I should try less hard next time.

Ignoring the appeal to emotion, this may well be a playstyle thing. I tend to become more active as the game progresses, and I daresay the same is true of others.

[Erg0]

Given that you just told me how I should meta you, you'll forgive me if I don't take it at face value.

Meta aside, would you disagree that bus'ing is a poor strategy in a nightless game?

Depends on the situation and the individual. It's possibly a slightly better strategy than it would otherwise be, but it's not the

only

way to play.

My point was more that you said you'd wait for vollkan's opinion, but didn't actually do anything with it when it came. One possible explanation is you were using the wait for vollkan as an excuse to avoid hammering your buddy, in the hope that the wagon would go away in the meantime.

If your point was simply to show that vollkan had weighed in why did you take the effort to post his readout of armlx, and why did you post his readout without listing other players on team LU?

The point of the analysis was to list people's actions relating to armlx. vollkan's ratings of the other players aren't really relevant in this context. It wasn't exactly an effort to list his percentage, I'd already made full notes on every player's relationship with armlx, so I had it right in front of me. "vollkan put him at 70%" is just shorthand for "vollkan gave his opinion and felt armlx was reasonably scummy". There may have been a couple of others rated higher, but 70% is still a pretty scummy rating, and I wouldn't have thought that it would discourage you from voting armlx yourself.

[Erg0]

Do you always answer a question with a question?

[Erg0]

Touche.

[Erg0]

@ Erg0: I seriously fail to see why armix and I are now best buddies. My unfos was because I believed his opinion. He wasn't really on my radar because I was much more focused on the other team and Erg0 and Dean Harper inspired more suspicion in my heart than armix did. I am being honest.
If your whole case is based on my incorrect value judgment of armix, then I suggest you find a different angle. Then again, I I still don't really mind the attention all that much. As soon as people find the target of "bilateral action against the common enemy" (in Pooky's words) we can move onto diagnostic. I have stated repeatedly that I do not mind being this person. Instead of needlessly analyzing me in a period where votes don't weigh as much as in the latter stage, just vote me already.

You're still missing the point. It's not the unFoS that's suspicious, it's the fact that you switched in your later post and said that you were ok with armlx being lynched. I'm not suspicious of you because you were wrong, I'm suspicious of you because you suddenly switched to supporting the lynch of someone who turned out to be scum. This suggests that you knew his alignment and wanted to make yourself look good (or less bad) when he was lynched.

[Erg0]

I think armix hesitated to vote for Jive Machine because he was afraid that his vote placement (hammer) would make his partner look more scummy. Who was the second person to vote for Jive Machine?

What makes you think that he hesitated? His hammer came pretty quickly after I put the second vote on (in terms of the number of posts in between).

[Erg0]

Are you planning on declaring your result? Given that we have no NKs in this game, I don't see any reason not to.

[Erg0]

I'm not nagging him, I was just asking what his intentions where, and also canvassing opinions on whether declaring the result immediately was the best plan.

[Erg0]

*where=were

[Erg0]

I'm not nagging him, I was just asking what his intentions where, and also canvassing opinions on whether declaring the result immediately was the best plan.

I agree that he should give the result as soon as possible, it's just that the timestamps made me jump a bit.

It's mostly an "easy there" type thing instead of implying any fault on your part.

Group hug!

Also, let's not lynch vollkan.

[Erg0]

Why "quick"?

I'm seriously considering switching to TG based on my armlx analysis (and the lack of agreement on shaft.ed), but I'm going to re-read him fully first.

[Erg0]

I think armix hesitated to vote for Jive Machine because he was afraid that his vote placement (hammer) would make his partner look more scummy. Who was the second person to vote for Jive Machine?

What makes you think that he hesitated? His hammer came pretty quickly after I put the second vote on (in terms of the number of posts in between).

Adel: can you answer this please?

[Erg0]

I don't see how another game could possibly impact on whether armlx hammering 18 minutes after the lynch-1 vote can be considered hesitation.

[Erg0]

Generally as cop I would investigate the person that I'm

least

certain of. It tends to make things easier in the long term, because those are often the people that are still alive later in the game when you have little to no margin for error. Confirmation on TG would be useful, but we're going to find out about him soon enough anyway.

Speaking of which, I largely agree with what vollkan has written above about TG. His QFT post right after the lynch, plus the stuff relating to armlx from day 1, are enough for a me to do this:

Unvote, Vote: TrustGossip

Note that this is lynch-1. Don't hammer if you don't mean it.

I'm keeping an eye on shaft.ed, but his overall play gives me a better feeling than his armlx interactions in isolation. TG scores poorly on both counts.

[Erg0]

Inconsistency can be a sign of recklessness

or

opportunism. It's particularly suspicious when a player supports a popular wagon despite havign spoken positively about the lynchee prior to that.

You're assuming that TG is doing it consciously, whereas I'm not (and I don't think vollkan is either).

[Erg0]

[quote="Near

Inconsistency can be a sign of recklessness or opportunism. It's particularly suspicious when a player supports a popular wagon despite havign spoken positively about the lynchee prior to that.

Your first sentence sounds cool. Although I haven't though of it this way before, I agree with you. But IIRC, most of TG's inconsistencies are NOT FROM supporting a popular wagon.[/quote]

The one that I'm primarily interested in is his inconsistency on armlx, who was a popular wagon. It appears to me that he was defending his buddy for a while but changed tack when he realised that a lynch was inevetable.

[Erg0]

Adel, can you

please

answer my question about armlx's hammer? The "ongoing game" excuse doesn't make any sense to me in this context.

[Erg0]

Sorry, been sick (still am, in fact). How ironic.

Ages:
Erg0: 29
curiouskarmadog: 18
Near: 25
vollkan: 35
PookyTheMagicalBear: 30
Adel: 86 (with 7 cats)
shaft.ed: 20

I'm not very good at this.

[Erg0]

Average ages, according to my calculations:

Near 19.59
ckd 31.73666667
shaft.ed 32.59833333
Erg0 34.14833333
Pooky 35.5
vollkan 38.925
Adel 44.24

Feel free to check that I'm right.

[Erg0]

Looks about right.

[Erg0]

Erm... good-o then.

Vote: Adel

[Erg0]

Mine neither.

[Erg0]

Day 1 has reminded me of the folly of attempting to use post-hammer reactions as scumtells. TG's sudden turnaround after the Beep! lynch looked bad to me, and he came up town.

[Erg0]

I suppose that TG's comment didn't technically fall into twilight, but it did remind me of my usual policy of disregarding almost anything said between the lynch and the night scene. I'd kind of let that slide due to the whole nightless thing, but I think it's as valid here as it is in any other game.

[Erg0]

Reason: I think she is scum. Almost everybody that sucks up to me turns out to be scum.

[Erg0]

I have to ask one thing: if you knew it would make you look scummy, why did you post it?

[Erg0]

Welp, I was up for a shaft.ed lynch yesterday so you know that I'll support a wagon on him. I do like my vote where it is right now, though.

[Erg0]

The last couple of pages have made my brain hurt.

[Erg0]

In short: not much. Certainly not enough to determine his alignment from them, though I do find it a mite strange that he would go out of his way to do something that he apparently knew would make him look scummy.

That said, I don't think that Near is today's play.

[Erg0]

Sure, why not?

Seriously, though: I think that she has crossed the line from gambiting townie to manipulative scum.

[Erg0]

I don't know if this qualifies as gut, but I really didn't like this from Adel:

Erg0 is supposed to be a very strong player according to other players I respect, so I'm interested in seeing what else he will add to this game.

This was her reason for choosing to vote TG over me on day 2. My immediate reaction when someone tells me how good I am is to become suspicious, especially when I've recently blitzed somebody the way I did TG at the start of day 2 and done a big analysis as I did with the armlx links. I gave her the benefit of the doubt at the time because I agreed with her basic suspicion of TG, but "I hear he's good" is hardly a valid reason not to lynch somebody, especially after her comment on day 1 about Pooky and I being "hard to lynch". Now that I know TG was town, I look back at her FoS on me after the day 1 lynch and her subsequent eagerness to pursue a TG lynch and I'm thinking that she was going after the target that the town would be most likely to follow her on, whilst trying to keep me onside by stroking my ego at the same time.

[Erg0]

I doubt I can swing an Adel wagon in 48 hours, so let's try a more realistic option.

Vote: shaft.ed

[Erg0]

Adel, what on earth are you doing?

[Erg0]

It was a simulpost. I'm not paying a lot of attention to her voting patterns anyway since she's been all over the place so far.

[Erg0]

Why?

[Erg0]

In short: yes, you are wrong. I found him scummiest after my armlx analysis yesterday and I have said that I supported wagoning him today. My vote for shaft.ed should not be a surprise to anyone.

[Erg0]

Anything in the thread is fair game.

[Erg0]

Adel has made me confused most of the game...this is a radical playstyle change for her. The only reason that she has stayed off my scumdar (lately) is because of her voting habits with armix earlier in the game. I cant imagine the Adelscum, would be that closely linked to armixscum that early in the game..of course, it could be a ploy, but I dont know.

I don't really agree with the second part of this post - Adel has been known to pull some pretty brazen stunts as scum (e.g. trying to persuade everyone to post encrypted roleclaims in Doctor Who 2) so I wouldn't put this past her at all, especially given that it happened so early in the game.

I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing Adel's playstyle issues, though.

[Erg0]

If ARB is on townie side, this means that people we trust are not scums.

I don't think that it's reasonable to assume that the mod is on

anyone's

side. When I'm modding I can't even remember who the scum are most of the time, so I don't think we can infer much on alignments based on this.

Other than that, I admire your honesty.

[Erg0]

Crap.

[Erg0]

Crap, there's less than an hour left and it seems unlikely you're going to be lynched.

[Erg0]

In proper Australian fashion, my nicknames will be based upon the opposite of each person's actual nature.

Adel: Norm
vollkan: Mr To-the-Point
shaft.ed: Wishy Washy Wally
Pooky: Captain Talkative
curiouskarmadog: Shrinking Violet

[Erg0]

I really have no idea what the result of this could be - all of the options that I can think of (e.g. mod's favourite nickname) are highly subjective.

That said, I'm fine with whichever set is chosen. If we're using mine then my nickname should actually be "Has a Gimmick", btw.

[Erg0]

Was there a diceroll for day 3? I can't find it.

[Erg0]

Inidentally, I suspect that the timing of yesterday's twist was related to a number of pages - witness Albert's filler posts to push us over to the top of the page.

Adel, based on your lynch order you seem to be suggesting that we lynch you in a 3 player end game, which is obviously suicidal if you're town. I'd recommend a rethink.

[Erg0]

It only matters in the sense that you chose for some reason to put yourself above ckd in the lynch order. You're right in saying that the situation is unlikely to arise, because you won't live that long.

My preferred lynch order is Adel, Pooky, shaft.ed. Yesterday's result has bought shaft.ed some good faith, but I'd still lynch him before ckd unless something changes.

[Erg0]

I don't like the attempt to rush. None of the twists so far have been crippling for the town, there's no reason to assume that would be the case today. I also think that Adel is a much better lynch than me.

Vote: Adel

[Erg0]

I'm not saying we should stand around twiddling our thumbs, but I also don't think that we should rush a lynch just for the sake of avoiding it. Now is not the time to abandon discussion in favour of oddsmaking.

[Erg0]

Done some re-reading on Near, and I'm going to drop shaft.ed altogether as a suspect for now. I don't see Near as the kind of guy that would replace into a game and immediately try to bus his sole partner by associating him with lynched scum, especially when there were already a couple of cases on him (shaft.ed) for similar reasons. Coupled with the way that yesterday ended, shaft.ed is looking at about as townish as ckd in terms of relationships with lynched scum.

This leaves me with Adel and Pooky, both of whom Near was pretty quiet on. I note that in one post he defends both of them (along with TG) for their lack of transparency, which strikes me as a "safe" situation in which to defend his buddy. Going back to the original teams, Pookyscum would mean that all three scum joined L-Unit on the first day, which I consider less than 50% likely (though by no means impossible). This, coupled with my previous problems with Adel, makes me increasingly confident that Adel is our last scum.

[Erg0]

I love it when scum mistake me for an easy target! It is probably the most rewarding aspect of my current playstyle. I'm sold on Erg0 being an accurate lynch.

I love when scum attempt to act all nonchalant about my suspicions of them, it shows me that I'm on the right track.

[Erg0]

Adel, why are you so enthusiastic about being lynched? And why are you trying to turn this into a false dilemma?

[Erg0]

A choice between you and me is, by definition, a false dilemma. There is at least one other player (Pooky) that is a viable lynch candidate for today. By placing yourself in direct competition with me you're attempting to force others into taking a narrow view of the situation.

My guess is that you're expecting them to look back at our respective voting records and lynch me based on that - which would explain why you're not giving a case on me. That comment on others' intelligence is exactly the kind of manipulative phrasing that I'm voting you for.

[Erg0]

You might want to justify that statement a little rather than just throwing it out there and hoping that nobody notices that it doesn't make any sense.

[Erg0]

Yup. Plenty of times.

[Erg0]

my thoughts are that we will probably find the last scum on the attempted Shafted Wagon.

Erg0 is a fine start.

vote Erg0

Who's your second option? Based on that logic I'd have to assume it's Adel.

[Erg0]

Adel's dropped into meta discussions, I see, once again deftly avoiding responding to the content of my posts whilst deferring to an argument regarding the tone.

In case anyone missed it, I believe I'm currently at lynch-1.

[Erg0]

That's not helpful. It's high time you actually started sharing your opinions with the rest of us, beyond "that one guy's scum".

Also, this doesn't fit with your earlier statement that you think the scum was on the shaft.ed wagon. It was only me, Adel and Near on that wagon, so if you meant what you said then you'd have some inclination towards lynching Adel if/when I'm lynched as town. You obviously have other motives, and you need to state what they are. Letting a lynch go through with such a poor standard of discussion would hurt the town massively in tomorrow's post-mortem.

[Erg0]

I admire your persistence, if not your transparency.

[Erg0]

I would imagine if I were a scumbag and there was a timer on my buddy's life, I'd try to get a mislynch to save his ass.

Nobody else's really tried to save Near's ass from being fried by a twist. So yea I think you're scum.

You still didn't answer my question. Who is your second option? This is going to be important tomorrow if you lynch me today.

I mean, it's not like I'm trying to get you lynched here. Why are you so reluctant to answer me? Are you

that

sure that you're right?

Incidentally, the above post was aimed at Adel.

[Erg0]

I was coming back to make that point - Adel and ckd both made a good attempt at getting me lynched in opposition to Near. You'll note that Adel was on

both

of the wagons that were attempting to save Near.

[Erg0]

Yes, what possible motivation could scum have to put an unreasoned lynch-1 vote on someone other than their buddy right before deadline?

[Erg0]

what's motivation behind that?(to try to get somebody to jump on you duh)

Do you mean she was trying to trap scum into mistakenly hammering a townie after the deadline in an attempt to save their buddy?

If so, wouldn't that rely on her thinking that I'm town?

[Erg0]

In thinking about it, that would be a reasonable gambit for scum: If someone hammers and it counts then the town is down a player and her buddy is saved. If it doesn't count then the person who false-hammered looks like scum trying to save their buddy. The scum who placed the lynch-1 vote just has to say that it was a setup to catch hammering scum and they'll be somewhat in the clear.

[Erg0]

if you are town and Near is scum, then a scum might try to hammer afterwards

If you are scum and Near is scum, then scum has no incentive to hammer afterwards.

Basically at the point when she voted, Near was dead.

However if near had been on at that time and seen that vote WITHOUT knowing he was dead, he would place a vote on you if you were town because he'd want to save his own ass.

the fact that he didn't implies either you are scum or he wasn't paying attention.

Near's last post was 2 hours prior to deadline, it seems pretty likely that he wasn't around. Even if he was, it was pointed out very quickly that Adel's vote was after the deadline. I'd say his lack of hammer implies exactly nothing.

there are plenty of reasons why she'd slap -one vote on you exactly one minute after deadline.

I don't see her doing it as scum.

There

are

plenty of reasons, yes - including the reasons that I gave above regarding why she might do it as scum.

Regardless, I think we've established that Adel isn't your second option. If not her then who? ckd also fits your criteria, is it him?

[Erg0]

anyone else notice Ergo's increase in posting...Ergo, are you trying out your page theory to hurry toward the twist?

Not deliberately, though I figure that the twist wouldn't be any worse for the town than quicklynching me. Plus, if I'm going to be lynched then I might as well try to make myself at least somewhat useful first by trying to get something better than "he's scum" out of the voters.

I commend your decision to reread Near.

[Erg0]

Do you expect me to restrict myself to posting defence? Is that what you would expect a good townie to do in my situation?

Also, where did I imply that I would settle on lynching Pooky? He's my second option, but only if there's no possibility of you being lynched.

[Erg0]

You guys hammered Erg0 ?

No, unless I miscounted.

[Erg0]

Reminder: deadline is 7:40 PM tonight. Unfortunately, I am in the process of moving so I don't think I can check this game regularly. I will try to sign on by 7:00 PM ish and see if changing my vote can lynch someone.

Can you guys try to find a best lynch candidate before then.

Possibly my last post;

Adel: I am 26
Vollkan, please do a re-read. At this point, I have confidence in you.
Please for my sake get some discussions going and try to find the best lynch.

This is his last post

he said he'd be on

why would he choose to not be on?

That post says that he's busy and would

try

to be on about 40 minutes before deadline to see if there was another wagon that he could get on. You're assuming that he was lying, because I don't see anything in there that implies he had full control of his situation.

[Erg0]

Final vote count

Pooky - Shafted
Erg0 - Adel, Volkan, Pooky
Adel - Erg0

6 alive, 3 to fire.

Last chance to correct me hehe

In case you're seriously asking for a correction, it's four to lynch under usual rules.

[Erg0]

Sigh.

[Erg0]

Should we also ignore the fact that you were so evidently excited by the fact that Erg0 was lynched?

Woah, Erg0. I think they just hammered you. I can't believe it.

There's no twist, you just hammered Erg0!!

I'm fairly sure he wasn't actually going to go through with the lynch, but you never know with Albert I suppose.

vollkan, am I correct in assuming that your vote is based on your case in 929? If so, I'll give you a response in the near future.

I'd also like to ask for a day or so to write a full case against Adel. It's becoming clear that I can't rely on others to reach the same conclusions as me on their own.

[Erg0]

I'm being selective here, so please point out anything that I didn't address.

30: Thinks we are choosing between shafted, jive and CKD (If erg0 is scum, this probably means one of shaft.ed and ckd is also -

probably

). Raises weak arguments against shaft.ed - that he seems to be trying to appear active, but has some "good stuff". Says TJM has done "some scummy things (e.g. twice FoSing and then switching to a vote after pressure was applied)" - raises as potential newbie, but expresses willingness to lynch (which he didn't do for shaft.ed)

The first sentence is now impossible, obv. This was more or less just preliminary reads.

31: Some of shaft.ed's posts have been "somewhat weak"

Pot. Kettle. Black

I think you've misinterpreted what I meant here - I was referencing my disagreement with a number of the scumtells that shaft.ed was using on day 1.

32: Denies over-reaction as a tell for CKD
40: Expresses suspicion about Beep's hammer
41: Votes Beep. The reasons are very "broad":

He seems like a pretty good option for a day 1 lynch, I'd say. Even if the hammer truly was an accident, the vote was wagonny, and his predecessor was fairly scummy. Also, I don't want to spend five pages arguing about him tomorrow.

Effectively, the only reason he gives is a reference to the play of TJM and that he doesn't want Beep remaining come D2.

I can only agree, that was a poor vote on my part. I'd lost focus on armlx as he wasn't a lynch candidate for me, and failed to consider the possibility that if Beep was a townie then he would jump in and drop the quick hammer. As such, I voted in a "wagon" frame of mind rather than a "lynch" frame of mind, and allowed my standard of proof to drop. I did think that Beep had a decent chance of being scum, but I really wasn't ready to go home at that point.

44-54: On TG's alleged distancing from Beep's lynch. Erg0 is in the right here.
61: Thinks CKD is very likely town given interaction with armlx. Iffy on Adel since she had her vote on armlx, but also attacked the TJM wagon despite having been on it. Suspects myself and shaft.ed more since we weren't on the wagon

I'm increasingly becoming interested in Adel's posts in this part of the game. More on that later.

62-64: Summarises armlx interactions. Concludes shaft.ed is likely scumbuddy and votes accordingly.
71: Suspects TG for his sudden turn on armlx
80: Votes TG for the megaFoS and armlx interactions

This is where I start to get on top of things a bit more than I was on day 1. Seems kind of skimmed over, there's a fair bit of content in those posts.

87: Votes Adel. Why?

Watch this space.

Erg0's been hanging in the background for most of this game, and that worries me. I don't find too much which is suspect in what he has said, but the way he has been making many posts whilst hanging back somewhat is concerning. I put him at

55%

. Again, I prefer N

That's your conclusion from the PbP.

Erg0 is most concerning me at this stage. His play has been to hang back in a manner that suggests he is keeping his cards too close to his chest, and his Beep vote seems particularly "forced" (to use CKD's description).

That's from the post where you vote me. You don't give any further reasons when you revote today, so I'm assuming that this applies to the latter vote as well.

I can't deny that I wasn't really on top of things on day 1, but I don't think I've been "hanging back" since then - I did a fair bit of analysis and took strong positions on TG and shaft.ed on day 2, as well as looking in some detail at all of the other players. I'm mildly perturbed that you skipped over this somewhat in your PbP, but I'll assume that's due to haste rather than duplicity. I concede that the day 1 vote was a bad move, but I don't think that you've even established that my vote was scummy rather than just dumb. I certainly don't think that this case is a fair basis for an attempt at a speedlynch, and I'd especially caution against becoming too casual about mislynches just because we have a couple to spare.

[Erg0]

That's arguable, but it's not part of the case that vollkan presented as a basis for his vote.

I think that there was a good basis for my suspicions and I provided plenty of background reasoning. This type of thing has worked well for me in the past - e.g. I had VitaminR in my top three on day 2 of Calvin & Hobbes based on this type of analysis (right before he killed me).

I'm not sure what you mean about the timing, though. Can you please clarify what you find suspicious there?

[Erg0]

I think Shaft Head might be onto something, btw.

[Erg0]

Roses are red
Violets are blue
This game is awesome
And Albert is too

[Erg0]

Also, if someone kills me before I finish this Adel analysis I will hunt them down and fillet them.

[Erg0]

I also have a daykill. I'm also not going to use it yet. I'm fairly confident that Adel will be lynched if she kills me, so this looks like a MAD situation.

[Erg0]

Nice try.

[Erg0]

It's somewhat counter-intuitive for me to analyse somebody the way I think I need to analyse Adel. I'm normally much more "big picture" in my approach, but the deliberately strange patterns that she tends to adopt have forced me to look more at the fine details of her posts to find clues to her alignment. I feel that the key here is to filter out the deliberate strangeness and look at what's left. Deliberate strangeness is not indicative of alignment, purely because it's intended (at least partially) to create a certain impression.

Note that post numbers are from viewing Adel's posts in isolation.

On day 1, Adel was the second vote on armlx's lynch, apparently following ckd. She did push him a bit after she voted, but she never directly called for a hammer as she does on day 2 with TG. She also approved of the Beep! wagon for most of the day (see below).
On day 2 she pushes the TG wagon all the way to the bank, partially based on what I think is fallacious logic (again, see below).
On day 3 she started off being certain that shaft.ed was scum, switched to Near for very little reason and then unvoted altogether and apparently let the clock run out. I'm not sure whether the late vote was deliberate or accidental, but I don't see this as a tell for reasons I've already explained.

One thing that has characterised Adel's play in this game is failed theories:
- In her 6th and 9th posts (as background to her TG vote) she thinks that scum are more likely to have joined the first team (L-Unit) than the second. When I point out the flaw in this theory she semi-agrees in her 12th post but keeps her vote in place anyway. This all seems like poor cover for her early wagon thing, though I tend to think that she wasn't anticipating the stated reasoning being questioned since she missed it the first time I asked.
- She spent a lot of time talking about how scummy Jive around the time the teams were split (29, 31, 33). In 44 she's less sure, thinking he might be befuddled town, then in 46 she asks me for a meta read on him (possibly because I was in another game with him at the time). I don't believe she ever comments on my response that he seems different from the other game. In 48 she says again that she thinks Jive is town, but after Beep comes in and drops the hammer she implies in 54 that she doesn't believe his vote was accidental, then says in 55 that she wants to lynch him tomorrow. After I put the second vote on him, she says in 58 that she endorses my vote. By post 61 she's swung around, saying "If you want to identify scum look at Beep! Beep!'s wagon", then discredits her own case in 62 when I point out that she supported the wagon, but again doesn't move her vote. She eventually pushes TG's wagon all the way to lynch.
- In post 78 she advances the theory that armlx delayed his hammer to give his buddy some breathing room. Again I point out that this is incorrect and she goes for the ongoing game defence before eventually admitting that she didn't check her facts.
- Proposed lynch order in 114 results in town loss in traditional endgame (irrelevant here, but I don't think she knew that). Uses the "whatever" defence for this one.
- Case against me today has been one strawman or vague condemnation after another. She's using what I call the "stick and move" approach, throwing as much stuff as the she can think of at me and then dropping the points that I successfully refute (e.g. "easy target" comment in 118, false dilemma in 120, meaningless drivel in 123, poor attempt at a meta in 124, ignoring my response to craplogic from 127). You can't lose an argument if you refuse to engage the other person, I suppose. Her failure to follow up on post 124, where she asks "have you ever been this combative as town before?", is the biggest problem here. I deliberately replied without an example to see if she'd follow up, and she just let it drop. Someone who was interested in lynching the right player (as opposed to just lynching anyone) would have asked for an example there rather than just taking my word for it. This is exemplary of her entire case on me: she's making it up as she goes along, and shaping others' opinions through simple repetition rather than actual evidence.

Miscellanea:
- Adel says in 41 that she thinks that Pooky and I would be toughest to nail as scum. She later says in 84 that I'm "supposed to be a very strong player according to other players [she] respect

", the basis for which is later clarified as being BM's comments in the Scummies judging. This leads me to wonder what the basis for post 41 was, since it was made much earlier in the game, likely before BM would have made such a comment. I've played with Adel before, but if she hadn't arrived at a conclusion about my ability based on those games (apparently relying on BM's comments instead) then where did 41 come from? A comment like this out of the blue just raises my defences.
- In post 86, Adel tells a floundering Near to hammer TG. Less than 20 (game) posts later, Near does just that. Circumstantial, but notable.

There's a lot more in my head that I'm having trouble organising, but I thought I'd better post this much now in case I actually am dead.

[Erg0]

Adel, if you got the same PM as me then we both know I'm not dead.

[Erg0]

Did everybody get a daykill?

[Erg0]

I'm just going to go with "bah".

[Erg0]

Wow - I should have trusted my day 1 analysis after all.

This is probably a good case study of how badly a town can self-destruct when daykills are added to the mix. Adel and Pooky should probably have explained

why

they wanted shaft.ed to make the last kill, because I suspect that they thought he might not really have one (as did I towards the end).

Still, I thought Adel was most likely to be the scum simply because her fast kill on me looked like a desperate act, and not something that I would have expected from a rational townie. I'm not sure if she was going for the hero play or if she really misread the rules, but I was expecting her to realise that if she killed me and I was town then she'd be in serious trouble.

shaft.ed did well to recover from his poor showing on day 1, to the point where I didn't really start to think of him as possible scum again until Pooky killed ckd.

Good game overall, though I do think that the daykill phase ended up overshadowing the rest of it to an extent. I'm a bit disappointed that we didn't manage to win after such a good start, but I suppose I should have stayed alive if I wanted to do something about that.